Knockoffs: Articles of Interest #8

Avery Trufelman:
When your name is Dan, you get a lot of nicknames. Growing up in Harlem, Daniel Day heard his fair share of them.

Dapper Dan:
Sometimes I go back to my old neighborhood on the East Side where everybody calls me Danny Boy.

Avery Trufelman:
But the sobriquet that would stick, the one most people would come to know, was Dapper Dan. Because from a young age he liked to look good.

Dapper Dan:
Clothes was a transformative thing. If you got dressed, when you got really dressed up and you went downtown, nobody knew you came from the poorest neighborhood in Harlem. That’s what made a difference. People of color, when you dress, that has an equalizing effect on how you feel, especially if you can dress better than the white kids that you see.

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan’s life took a lot of crazy turns, including, but not limited to, years of running street bets and dice games, a ring of credit card fraud, an arrest in Aruba, time in prison, he was a hustler and a gambler for decades. But what he’s best known for is what he did after all that, when he decided to get away from his life of crime … sort of.

Dapper Dan:
When I didn’t want to be involved in all the gangs, street gangs, negative street gangs, I looked for something else to do.

Avery Trufelman:
The year was 1980. Dan was in his late 30s.

Dapper Dan:
Since I knew all the people who liked to dress and the ones who had the money, I said that would be a great opportunity for me. And I knew that that door would be open for me.

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan wanted to get into the fashion game, to live up to his honorific. But he had to start somewhere, so he started selling stolen clothes-

Dapper Dan:
Out of the back of my car, a used car. I’d go around to all the hustlers, all the spots where they’d be at, all the street people.

Avery Trufelman:
And he got a real taste for the kinds of fashions people in Harlem were looking for. Dan’s clients wanted color and flair and personality, not the dark, Eurocentric stuff you’d find in a Madison Avenue boutique.

Dapper Dan:
So you want real soul fly stuff? You want to get into that gritty soul look? You got to come to a real gritty soul guy.

Avery Trufelman:
So, Dapper Dan saved up money and opened a shop in 1982. He hired tailors and seamstresses, and created custom furs and leather goods for his clients, making whatever they wanted. Dapper Dan and his tailors were pretty dynamic. He didn’t have any one signature look or style. That was, until one day, when one of the most popular hustlers in Harlem marched into Dan’s shop.

Dapper Dan:
He came into the store one day, he had a Louis Vuitton pouch, and it was full of $100 bills. So everybody’s looking at it, and everybody got excited about it.

Avery Trufelman:
But everyone was ignoring the $100 bills.

Dapper Dan:
They got excited about the bag itself. And I looked at that bag, I say, “Wow, why are they excited? It’s only $5 worth of vinyl, I know all about that.” But it was the symbols on the bag.

Avery Trufelman:
Those little L’s and V’s, and quatrefoils all over that Louis Vuitton bag. And in that moment, Dapper Dan came up with an idea that would turn fashion upside down.

Dapper Dan:
A bulb went off in my head, “Oh…”

Avery Trufelman:
And his idea was to take those symbols on that bag and steal them.

[OPENING SONG]

Avery Trufelman:
Articles of Interest, a show about what we wear. Season 2.

[People don’t realize it’s fantasy.]

[There’s always this thing that you have to work extra hard to get.]

[Hmm, that’s so good.]

[No one dresses like a king anymore.]

[How do you make money? That’s how I make money, love.]

[There are lots of things that we take for granted that would once have been considered luxuries.]

Avery Trufelman:
Sometimes, if I’m passing through downtown San Francisco or Manhattan, or in an airport, or in a mall, I’ll look around and I’ll take stock of the retail landscape. Massive posters of pore-less, doe-eyed faces stare down at me, advertising handbags that cost double my rent. And sometimes I look around and I’m just like, “Who is this for? Who could possibly afford all this? How is there enough money around to keep all these brands in business in their flagship stores around the world? Who is impulsively buying a $2,000 Burberry coat wilting in an airport boutique? Who is stumbling into a Prada storefront to try on a dress? Who is this for?” Turns out, this is for you.

Kal Raustiala:
The point isn’t to make money, the point is to build up a brand and an identity that then will sell the things that do make money, which are usually accessories that are relatively cheap. So, everything from shoes, handbags, on down to little wallets and sunglasses and whatever.

Avery Trufelman:
UCLA law professor Kal Raustiala says that the luxe advertisements, the intimidating shops, and to a degree the runway shows, are about building up the mythology of a brand so that they can sell their logo on other stuff.

Kal Raustiala:
Couture often operates primarily to build a brand, and runway shows do that as well. A lot of stuff that goes on the runways never sees the light of day in a store.

Avery Trufelman:
It’s about the performance of a brand, the creation of a story. Because for the right name, the right symbol, we will buy something, not in spite of its price, but because of it.

Kal Raustiala:
Normally we think supply and demand are kind of driven by price, and that the cheaper something gets, more people are going to consume it. That’s true for most things. If gas is cheaper, people are going to drive more. That’s normal goods. Veblen goods, as they get more expensive, people are drawn to it.

Avery Trufelman:
Veblen goods are named for Thorstein Veblen.

Kal Raustiala:
Veblen was an economist way back in the distant past…

Avery Trufelman:
121 years ago, to be more precise.

Kal Raustiala:
… who talked about the fact that some things are more attractive the more expensive they are. And for certain things actually, the very cost of them is part of their appeal.

Avery Trufelman:
Luxury is almost like the quantum physics of economics, where all the established laws of supply and demand just go out the window.

Kal Raustiala:
That’s true for a lot of things in the fashion world because fashion is so often about both self-expression, but also about excluding others and showing that you have high status. So the more expensive and unattainable they are, the better.

Avery Trufelman:
And the more expensive and unattainable they are, the more likely it is that someone is going to knock them off.

[SOUNDS FROM CANAL STREET]

Avery Trufelman:
As Chinatown descends into the Financial District, all along Canal Street in Manhattan, people will approach you clad in black baseball caps, holding up laminated sheets of paper. And these laminated bits of paper are basically menus showing the variety of knockoff handbags they’re peddling.

Avery Trufelman:
“How much for number 21?”

Street Vendor:
“That one?”

Avery Trufelman:
“Yeah.”

Street Vendor:
“$100, nice quality, very good quality. But this original, $1,400.”

Avery Trufelman:
When you point to a bag on the laminated menu, your dealer will go fetch it from a storeroom nearby. This convoluted system helps the sellers keep a low profile. Although, there are also some bold vendors who just put their wares right there on the sidewalk.

Avery Trufelman:
“And here’s a velvet Gucci bag. It’s actually extremely cute.”

Avery Trufelman:
The street vendors lay their bags on a big sheet so that they can pull up the corners and run away when they see the police coming. This is, of course, illegal.

Kal Raustiala:
Anytime you’re copying a brand, a trademark, a logo, you’re breaking the law.

Avery Trufelman:
A logo is protectable by law. That’s true of any two-dimensional image or drawing or pattern or print.

Kal Raustiala:
If the print is actually original to you, it’s not in the public domain, it’s a two-dimensional image, you can protect that.

Avery Trufelman:
This is, in part, why many luxury brands started to pattern their logos all over their handbags in the first place. It’s like watermarking an image to try to protect it. But, like any illegal trade, these knockoffs don’t exist in a bubble. Tourists flock to Canal Street from all over the world to buy these knockoff handbags, knowing full well they are knockoffs. If these shoppers really needed handbags, they could get high-quality unbranded ones for the same price somewhere else. They come to Canal Street for these powerful symbols.

[MUSIC]

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan witnessed the power of these symbols on that fateful day back in the 80s, when that one hustler in Harlem waltzed into his shop with that vinyl Louis Vuitton pouch and everyone gathered around the little bag, transfixed. That’s when Dapper Dan thought-

Dapper Dan:
Okay, if they are fascinated with those symbols, how about if I have them walking around looking like that bag?

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan didn’t want to take designer bags and replicate them.

Dapper Dan:
I wanted to do something nobody else had even thought of. I got to figure out how to transform them symbols into garments.

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan wanted to take these symbols, the logos of this old luggage company who at that point really only made bags, and he wanted to print them on clothing.

Dapper Dan:
I just started teaching myself, reading and going to trade shows, and so I taught myself everything.

Avery Trufelman:
And Dapper Dan started to print Louis Vuitton logos on things that Louis Vuitton could have never dreamt of. Leather tracksuits, skin-tight leather dresses, long bulletproof leather trench coats, full leather car interiors, as well as some totally original designs. Dapper Dan created this particularly distinctive jacket with a black fur torso and huge, puffy, leather balloon sleeves covered in LV’s. And he started using the logos of other legacy luxury brands, and fancy cars, and religious totems.

Dapper Dan:
I made these butter-soft jackets 30 years ago with the car logos on them.

Avery Trufelman:
His work was all festooned with symbols, and it was all very expensive.

Dapper Dan:
Very expensive stuff, very expensive stuff. There’s something about affordability that leads to fashion’s demise.

Avery Trufelman:
Even though he embossed his clothes with the marks of Gucci and Fendi and Louis, that was the only part of them that was actually a knockoff, because nothing like these designs had ever existed before. Dapper Dan invented a genre. He is the creator of high-end hip-hop fashion.

Dapper Dan:
When you come up with this idea and this twist, and it becomes you. So that’s how I developed, I had to show them, these brands, that I could interpret them for my community better than they could ever think of.

Avery Trufelman:
All around him, MCs were remixing pop music into beats, and Dapper Dan was remixing established luxury brands, known symbols, into something entirely new. Dapper Dan is one of the reasons logo mania took off in the 80s. He was taking these brands away from their expected homes, on luggage or cars, and putting them all over bodies. If you look at old pictures of Missy Elliott, or LL Cool J on “Yo! MTV Raps,” they’re wearing leather tracksuits covered with Gucci and Fendi logos. And those were not made by Gucci and Fendi, these designs were all original to Dapper Dan.

Dapper Dan:
People started seeing the outfits and started seeing the rappers with the outfits, and they started going to ask Gucci, they say, “I want the one I saw Roy Campbell in, I want the one I saw on LL Cool J.” At that point, people started saying, “Oh, y’all didn’t make this, this is coming from somewhere else?”

Avery Trufelman:
As Dapper Dan’s clients spread out into the mainstream, as hip-hop grew, the big fashion houses started to take notice of Dapper Dan and his trademark infringements. It started quietly at first, with covert agents visiting Dan’s Harlem shop.

Dapper Dan:
They have to buy a garment as evidence, take it to the courts. And of course, we would grant them a cease and desist order.

Avery Trufelman:
But Dapper Dan did not cease nor desist.

Dapper Dan:
They didn’t want us looking like them, touching their symbols. They sent the marshals and they had the rights to confiscate anything with their trademark on it.

Avery Trufelman:
The federal marshals marched into Dan’s shop with garbage bags. They came in waves – Gucci, Prada, Fendi – and the marshals carted off thousands of dollars worth of Dapper Dan’s custom work and his equipment.

Dapper Dan:
They kept raiding me, raiding me. How do I overcome this? How do I get around this?

Avery Trufelman:
“Why weren’t you tempted to stop?”

Dapper Dan:
“Why wouldn’t I stop?”

Avery Trufelman:
“Yeah.”

Dapper Dan:
“Why should I stop? I didn’t see no reason for me to stop.”

Avery Trufelman:
“But weren’t you scared about your business? Because it did, I mean…”

Dapper Dan:
“I grew up… Let’s go back. I come from the poorest neighborhood in Harlem. All I know is the system constantly stepping on me, stepping on me, stepping on us. So you had to learn to step back, figure out ways to navigate the system. That’s the way I looked at it. Here’s another obstacle, let’s deal with it.”

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan always knew what he was doing was illegal, always, but he had tangled with the law before in much more serious ways. He was used to hustling. So when the luxury brands came after Dan, he just found another way to go on.

Dapper Dan:
“So I go underground.”

Avery Trufelman:
“What did that look like?”

Dapper Dan:
“That was hell, but it was necessary.”

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan kept selling his work the way he used to sell his stolen clothes — out of his car. He lived as a nomad.

Dapper Dan:
I went underground. I had to make clothes. And I would hit every black city from here to Chicago, then come back and hit every black city from here to Atlanta. And that sustained me for 20 years.

Avery Trufelman:
Twenty years. Twenty years away from the eyes of Gucci and Prada and all the major brands you would expect to get upset about trademark infringement and call in the federal marshals. The law was pretty cut and dry. As our expert Professor Raustiala said…

Kal Raustiala:
It’s like a two-dimensional image, you can protect that.

Avery Trufelman:
It seems pretty simple, but that’s not how the law truly functions. When I think of a knockoff, I think of the imitation bags on Canal Street. I think of small vendors stealing the trademarks of huge companies. But big, wealthy, multinational fashion companies knock off small designers all the time – all the time – to the point where most of us might not realize we’re buying knockoffs at all.

Tuesday Bassen:
“When I first saw it, I was like, maybe it was a mistake. And then-”

Avery Trufelman:
“Like they made a mistake.”

Tuesday Bassen:
“Maybe I made a mistake, in thinking that it was too similar. I was like, maybe they don’t know.”

Avery Trufelman:
This is Tuesday Bassen. She’s an illustrator. And that’s how she got into the world of clothing.

Tuesday Bassen:
I started making clothes when I moved to LA. At the time I had put out a zine called “Ugly Girl Gang,” and the three girls on the front cover I had drawn were wearing satin jackets.

Avery Trufelman:
And on the back of their satin jackets are hearts that say “Mixed Emotions Club”.

Tuesday Bassen:
So many people would be like, “Oh, I would wear that jacket.” Being in LA, and being around clothing manufacturing, I was like, “Maybe I can make that jacket.”

Avery Trufelman:
Tuesday made her first bomber jacket in 2015. It looked exactly like the one her character in her zine is wearing. It’s satin with a big heart across the back that says “Mixed Emotions Club.”

Tuesday Bassen:
It sold out and I made some more.

Avery Trufelman:
Tuesday went on to design an entire line of pins and patches and accessories and clothes in a wide range of sizes. A lot of her illustrations are integrated into her clothing, so it’s an extremely personal thing. Which is why it was almost painful in 2016, when the fast fashion behemoth Zara sold a line of designs that looked exactly like Tuesday’s.

Tuesday Bassen:
It was my entire catalog of goods on their products, on various products, shirts, patches, everything.

Avery Trufelman:
This is illegal, especially since Tuesday had already registered her images.

Tuesday Bassen:
I am somewhat proactive about being litigious, and already had trademarks on most of the designs.

Avery Trufelman:
“That’s so smart.”

Tuesday Bassen:
“Yeah.”

Avery Trufelman:
So Tuesday did what you’re supposed to do. She issued a cease and desist notice.

Tuesday Bassen:
I think the scariest thing about it is that Inditex, the parent company of Zara, is the largest fast fashion company in the world.

Avery Trufelman:
Their founder, Amancio Ortega, at one point was actually the sixth wealthiest man on earth.

Tuesday Bassen:
Accusing the largest brand in the world, largest fast fashion brand in the world, of stealing my intellectual property is scary. It’s terrifying.

Avery Trufelman:
In this David and Goliath story, Tuesday summoned all her courage and threw a stone at the giant. And Goliath didn’t flinch. He barely even noticed.

Tuesday Bassen:
I got a letter back that basically said, “We’re big, you’re little. What do you want to do about? Nobody knows about who you are.”

Avery Trufelman:
When most people bought those Tuesday knockoffs from Zara, they had no idea they were knockoffs at all. To fight for her own integrity, Tuesday filed suit against Inditex.

Tuesday Bassen:
Having a lawsuit is not very fun.

Avery Trufelman:
Also, the legal costs mean nothing to Zara. To a small designer, it’s considerable.

Tuesday Bassen:
Good lawyers are so expensive. I mean, bad lawyers are so expensive, you know? It’s just exhausting to have to consistently defend what is legally yours.

Avery Trufelman:
Tuesday’s lawsuit eventually ended.

Tuesday Bassen:
God, last year, yeah. So for years it went on.

Avery Trufelman:
The only thing Tuesday can legally say about the situation now is that it was resolved to their mutual satisfaction. Anticlimactic, I know. But the kicker is, it’s not like Tuesday can relax now.

Tuesday Bassen:
Well, absolutely it is happening again. Actually, Bershka, another company by Inditex, who own Zara, has infringed on one of the same designs.

Avery Trufelman:
“No way.”

Tuesday Bassen:
“Yeah.”

Avery Trufelman:
On a hat was a little heart, and inside it said “Mixed Emotions Club.”

Tuesday Bassen:
It’s frustrating and it’s exhausting. But I also feel like, if I don’t continue to defend my brand and defend my intellectual property, this will continue happening to me. And it will happen to other people too.

Avery Trufelman:
This happens all the time. All the time. Everyone working as a designer knows it, to the point where it’s nearly unavoidable. In theory, the rules around trademark are supposed to be a bit of a trade-off. Yes, these laws might prevent independent designers like Dapper Dan from remixing other people’s images, but these laws are also supposed to protect designers like Tuesday from having their original images ripped off. And these stopgaps just aren’t working. The bigger, wealthier party always seems to win. It’s devastating for the little designer on either side of the law. Tuesday gets caught in litigation for years and years, and Dapper Dan has to go underground for decades.

Dapper Dan:
But that was my reaction to the opposition that I encountered. Not to get mad because they raided me. “Okay, this is what y’all do? This is what I do.”

Avery Trufelman:
After 20 years underground, driving across all the major black cities in America, something really unexpected thrust Dapper Dan back into the spotlight. It was May of 2017 when Gucci sent a jacket down the runway for their Cruise Collection. It was a very distinctive jacket with a black fur torso and huge, puffy, leather balloon sleeves covered in G’s. This jacket looked almost exactly like a design Dan made back in the 80s. Really, like, identical.

(music)

Avery Trufelman:
If you look at the images of Dapper Dan’s original and Gucci’s version of the jacket, Gucci very obviously indirectly knocked him off, 100% definitely. And, unlike what Dapper Dan had been doing, Gucci wasn’t remixing something old into something new. They just made an exact replica. While Gucci could call the federal marshals on Dapper Dan, Dapper Dan didn’t have that option. And it was not because Gucci is big and Dapper Dan is small. It’s because what Gucci did is perfectly legal.

Kal Raustiala:
The design in the American system is fully copyable.

Avery Trufelman:
Gucci wasn’t copying a two-dimensional image. It wasn’t a logo or a pattern. They were copying the design of the garment – the shape and the cut and the material. And you can totally just do that.

Kal Raustiala:
The American fashion industry is very, very successful. It makes a lot of money, it’s worldwide in its reach, it’s done very well over the last few decades. And yet the core idea, the design, can be copied by anyone, and is copied by anyone.

Avery Trufelman:
If you come up with a cool sleeve or a really different looking collar, you have no claim to it in the American copyright system. If you come up with something that’s useful or technologically innovative, like maybe it’s a new kind of sweat-wicking fabric, maybe you could get a patent.

Kal Raustiala:
In theory, a unique kind of toggle or button could be patented. It has to be non-obvious and novel. It’s a much higher hurdle to get a patent.

Avery Trufelman:
But otherwise, no. All designs are fair game. The argument for this lack of regulation is that it keeps the fashion cycle churning. After all, a trend means a thing that everyone is copying. New styles proliferate and spread, and we all go out shopping. And new styles proliferate and spread, and we all go out shopping. And new styles proliferate and spread, and we all go out shopping.

Kal Raustiala:
Yes. What copying does is enable the fashion cycle, the cycle of something coming into fashion and going out, it enables that to move more quickly.

Avery Trufelman:
Kal Raustiala and his co-author Chris Sprigman make this argument in their book, “The Knockoff Economy.” In fashion, everyone copies each other all the time because the clothing industry runs on a fuel concocted of desire and trend proliferation. You might buy a new phone every few years because the technology improves, but shirts generally don’t get better at shirting. You consume as your taste changes, and designers have to appeal to what you like and what style is in. And so they steal from each other.

Kal Raustiala:
Sometimes people take the view that copying is the ransom of success, and it’s a good thing, or it’s part of the ether, we just let it happen. It’s a little easier when you’re a really big company to do that. When you’re a small firm, it’s a little tougher.

Avery Trufelman:
Every couple of years, new legislation is brought forward to make American fashion law more strict, and it always falls through. Professor Raustiala argues that the reason is that fashion copyright is a double-edged sword. If you tighten up the rules to protect independent designers, you also tighten up the rules to protect major fashion houses who stand to gain far more than they have to lose. He argues that if fashion copyright was written more strictly and/or enforced more heavily, it could have odd cultural ripple effects.

Kal Raustiala:
Well, this is really an idea that I don’t want to claim. It’s a colleague of ours at NYU, Barton Beebe, who really first talked about this. But sumptuary codes in the past dictated who could wear what, and only certain classes of people could wear certain clothing.

Avery Trufelman:
And stricter fashion law could function like modern sumptuary codes. In a world with much stricter fashion copyright, if you wanted to wear something new and cool or trendy right now, you couldn’t unless you wanted to pay hundreds of dollars for the authentic, trend-setting designer piece. Even if you made your own version, if you sewed a particular kind of dress or blouse inspired by something you saw on Instagram, you could be sued for infringement.

Kal Raustiala:
And so one of the great things about the freedom to copy that we currently have is it enables everyone to wear designs. If a really popular design comes out of, let’s say Prada, at a very high price point, the average person, let alone a poor person, could never afford it. But the ability to knock off the design means that they too can wear that design, and they have access to it.

Avery Trufelman:
Although, let’s not take a democracy of goods as an actual form of democracy. You know our world is already fractured into tiers. People who take the bus, and people who take a Lyft; first class, business class, and extra leg room; those who can actually afford a $2,000 bag, and those who buy them on Canal Street; the designers who are big enough to protect their work, and those who aren’t.

Avery Trufelman:
“So were you upset when you saw them using your-”

Dapper Dan:
“No, I expect that. Even to this day, I never expect people to play fair.”

Avery Trufelman:
Dapper Dan himself had grown accustomed to injustice. But as soon as photos of Gucci’s jacket hit the Internet, Black Twitter was like, “Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.”

Dapper Dan:
Black Twitter hit. I said, “Wow, it’s that powerful?” I never had a voice before.

Avery Trufelman:
The online fashion world was outraged. People who remembered the jacket dredged it up again, and Dapper Dan was back on everyone’s lips for the first time in decades.

Dapper Dan:
Then all the social media started hitting, and people became familiar with where all these fashion ideas came from.

Avery Trufelman:
A torrent of Internet outrage was directed towards Gucci for copying Dapper Dan. And so Gucci did something very, very smart. They reached out to Dapper Dan only a few months later, in December of 2017, and they offered Dan a position as a designer, but with complete and absolute autonomy.

Dapper Dan:
That’s unheard of, right?

Avery Trufelman:
Now, Dapper Dan is doing exactly what he did before, still experimenting and remixing and making very expensive custom garments, except now, he can only use Gucci symbols, and his atelier in Harlem has a little Gucci sign out in front. So the big guy still kind of wins, but they’ve let Dapper Dan into the club because Dapper Dan is one of the most influential minds of the 20th century. He’s a success story. He’s a name. In other words, he’s a brand, so of course people are knocking him off.

Dapper Dan:
“Vendors run up to me and show me their knockoff Dapper Dan that they did personally.”

Avery Trufelman:
“Wait, really?”

Dapper Dan:
“Yes.”

Avery Trufelman:
“No way!”

Dapper Dan:
“Yes way. Yes way!”

Avery Trufelman:
“What do you think when you see that?”

Dapper Dan:
“What should I think? What am I going to say? What should I say? Look, I’m one guy. Gucci is a multinational corporation. Fendi and all these multinational corporations, they can’t stop it. It’s something that’s going to happen, you know what I’m saying?”

Avery Trufelman:
“You just let it be?”

Dapper Dan:
“Let it be. Of course.”

[CLOSING SONG]
‘Portrait’ by Sasami Ashworth
A pocket, a piece of paper.
Words from yesterday.
There’s a portrait, painted on the things we love.

Avery Trufelman:
Articles of Interest was written and performed by Avery Trufelman. Edited by Chris Berube with additional editing by Emmett FitzGerald. Scored by Rhae Royal. Fact-checked by Tom Colligan with additional fact-checking by Graham Hacia. Mixed by Sharif Youssef with additional mixing by Katherine Rae Mondo and Sean Real. Our opening and closing songs are by Sasami.

Special thanks this episode to Chris Sprigman and Ariele Elia.

Insights, support, and edits from the whole 99pi team, including Joe Rosenberg, Vivian Le, Abby Madan, Kurt Kohlstedt, Delaney Hall, and Katie Mingle.

And Roman Mars is the Real McCoy of this whole series.

[CLOSING SONG CONTINUED]
There’s a portrait, painted on the things we love. We love.